sk7326

I stand corrected - so basically he is striking out in Mike Napoli territory (his worst seasons). As I've noted before, how much of that is "can't" vs "conscious decision (Napoli)" is something which the scouting should answer.

For the staff: Porcello, Price, Rodriguez and Buchholz are probably your 4 starters Pomeranz goes to the pen Kimbrel, Uehara and Ziegler are locks ... that leaves 3 pitchers if you want an 11 man staff (my preference), 4 if you want 12. Now personally, I would be content with zero LOOGYs, as neither Abad nor Scott has proven enough to say they deserve one of the three spots. Kelly has been outstanding since coming back, and he can get 6 outs at a time as needed, so he is one of the choices for me. Hembree has dominated righties all season and he also can stretch out as needed The question for 1 spot to me is Barnes v Tazawa v Scott/Abad ... I don't know if I trust Scott on such a small amount of data to be able to get a lefty when it matters. Abad has been shaky but has a better track record. With the other pitchers you have the luxury to go with a 3 out guy here. Tazawa has looked good recently and has been well rested, and I cannot get behind Barnes still. So I'd go Kimbrel-Uehara-Ziegler-Kelly-Hembree-Tazawa + Pomeranz as my pen. The best thing I can say is that it's a really hard decision - and that is a compliment I never expected to utter.

Struck out nearly 40% of the time ... against AA pitchers. The swing and miss is real - there is a lot of work still at the plate. The numbers provide a sense of how crazy his ceiling is though.

Semi-off topic question ... The Red Sox clinched a tie last night with the Jays. If the unthinkable happened - would the Sox and Jays play it out if both were guaranteed playoff spots? (since the bye to the division series is a legitimate advantage)

I saw something on sportscenter yesterday ... only four times or something in the last 15 years the team with the best record won it all? Twice were Boston titles.

Scherzer's biggest competition is probably the kid - for obvious reasons. On the bright side, Fernandez DID lead the ML in fWAR. In reality, too few innings - but the innings were of such significantly higher quality than anybody else's.

About the same - though he has had a better season (helps to not have a suspension). Andrew Miller might have been better than either.

Put another way, I wouldn't want to pay ANYBODY a ton of money to work a particular designated inning (even the 9th, but the horse has left the barn there).

i don't think it is that so much as simple habit - teams do not align their bullpens that way except for rare exceptions ... pitchers like knowing when they will work, the way starters do - and I imagine build routine around that. In this specialized era, finding guys who can sort of work without that net is hard ... and it also means messing with creatures of habit who might get usurped by this dude. Obviously there are exceptions - Francona used Papelbon for 6 outs regularly in the postseason, and treated Foulke very much like a relief ace in 2004. But Foulke was a unique bird too.

Oh I don't know - the org decision to not spend stupid money on a reliever I am generally on board with. And they turned him into a quality young starter! For all the whining about the Red Sox not being able to develop pitching, Andrew Miller was an incredible triumph.

I don't think the outfield is etched in stone - after all the Red Sox have three capable CFs right now, and could easily deal one of them. And Devers might end up being the one at 3B anyway - and yes, he could also be dealt, but Dombrowski has been less inclined to be cavalier with elite position talent.

Watching Papi crying really got to me ... damn

Braves have been playing really well - amazingly ... so it'd be fun if the Tigers spit the bit on that series.

He shouldn't (those 20 extra innings of value!) - but the Cubs narrative will be very very strong.

And Miller has proven he can be a legitimate "relief ace" in the way that folks like us have begged for. You bring in Chapman or Jansen, you aren't buying much versatility.

Well it is modeling factors which have correlated with past Cys. So the methodology is sound, and we know that pitcher wins have historically meant a ton. I'd be surprised if he didn't win it.

A strikeout is an individual accomplishment, any other out is a team one. Also - if you want a non-analytic take, missing bats is preferable with the season on the line (and the 2015 World Series showed exactly what can happen when you don't). Porcello has been magnificent, and I hope he wins the award. It's a three man race and all of them are good choices.

Perhaps - although where Moncada's ultimate home is a very open question. There is very little chance Moncada has a starting job here. But 3B makes sense for the time being - and I am sure he will get some outfield work too. I am not off the train - but for all the hype of "#1 prospect in baseball", he might not have been the #1 prospect in the org.

Yes

Okay, 20 is THE record - individual or team. So the Red Sox on the verge of joining among the most exclusive clubs in history

what is the big league record for strikeouts in a game - not for a single pitcher, but a staff in general ... i mean only 3 non-strikeouts so far. Still 8 more outs to get 5 Ks.

The Sox approach has been copied - has been for a decade - it has been best in class along with the Cards among FO types.

which would be an emotionally satisfying, gratifying and VERY shaky outcome.

There is a lot of subjectivity with the MVP - especially when the field is fairly close. This year is also fairly close - as I noted, Betts winning is not any sort of robbery. (the example I always bring up for an actual robbery is Mo Vaughn in 1995) Ortiz would be good narrative - which is fine - but he has played less than his compatriots, and since his contribution is entirely offensive - he has to be a lot better than other guys on that dimension, and he isn't. The voting for the mvp in 1931 was of course when tools to measure actual value did not exist - you had to look at your classic roto stats and take the plunge. For me, it's Trout vs Betts. Given the tools to measure value, those two have delivered significantly more value than anybody else - so to me they are the most valuable players this season. It really comes down to whether Betts' defense is enough to offset the sheer number of outs he made compared to Trout. In real life, I expect Betts to win it.

One thing that is true about Sandoval is that he has always been good at getting his bat on the ball - the question with the playoff roster is what to do with the 25th spot if you are only sticking with 11 pitchers. Obviously Sandoval is useless for pinch running ... but as a fairly high contact bat with some playoff been there, done that - the idea is not insane.